• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Liberal Party of Canada Leadership

Status
Not open for further replies.
Navy_Pete said:
Ballz, I get what you're saying, but having a responsibility to execute an order doesn't mean you can't disagree during discussions leading up to it.  Once my CO makes a decision, I'll do everything I can to support and execute it, but that doesn't mean that prior to I won't argue to take a different course if there are valid reasons to do so.

You also have to consider the senior bureaucrats SMEs in their respective areas; maybe if you are a new Minister and someone senior in that department with a lot of experience is telling you privately that something is not a good idea, it might legitimately be because it's simply not a good idea.  Not that some of them don't have their own agendas, but they might want to listen and consider that it's a possibilty their plan/policy or whatever just won't work, or is perhaps illegal.

Blindly dismissing opposing opinions is and labeling them as 'enemies', in my opinion, how bad decisions get made.  Maybe they are just talking out of their arse, but using the devil's advocate ensures that something is looked at from all angles before it's put into place.

Also good ideas come from strange places, so by ignoring whole swaths of people they are also losing the opportunity to cherry pick the good parts and claim them as their own.


If I can paraphrase Bill Clinton: it all depends on what you mean by "senior."

As a general rule subject matter expertise "peaks" at the level of director (first executive level in the civil service/colonel or lieutenant colonel in the military) from director general onwards the "executive" skills and experience equal and then override any technical expertise. Thus, with a very, very few exceptions (the deputy minister of justice, for example, will almost always be a lawyer and the CF's surgeon general will almost always be a physician) deputy ministers of departments, like the ministers they serve, may have zilch to just little experience in or "expertise" about the departments they run. Look at the biography of Richard Fadden the deputy minister of DND ~ external affairs, PCO, auditor general, natural resources, TB, PCO again, Canadian Food Inspection Agency, natural resources again, citizenship, CSIS and then DND. Does it look like he's in DND because of his expertise in defence issues? And trust me, he has a whole helluva lot more say in defence policy matters than does Gen Lawson.

Very senior bureaucrats do have opinions, in fact they gather, on a pretty regular basis, to discuss their - not the partisan politicians' - grand strategy for Canada. My sense of them and their vision is that they/it are: socially liberal, fiscally conservative, cautious on matters of defence and foreign affairs, free traders, strong on law but not on order, generous towards First Nations, for increased immigration, nervous about China ... and America, right now, and resoundingly neutral on Conservatives vs Liberals vs NDP.

This ~ a balanced, neutral, long term civil service strategy versus a partisan, focused, short term political platform ~ is an essential feature of a Westminster style parliamentary democracy. The senior bureaucrats serve the politicians but they do so from a "firm base" of policy perspectives that is, generally, better informed than any other in the country.
 
That's a great point; I've never had to do anything for the DM specifically so generally tend to forget they exist.
 
Whether Trudeau actually gets Robertson and Freeland on his team is another story altogether:

link

Justin Trudeau looking for another high profile catch in Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson
By Andy Radia

Politics Reporter

It's been said that politics makes strange bedfellows.

But maybe this 'connection' isn't as strange as it appears on the surface.

According to Vancouver Province reporter Michael Smyth, Liberal leader Justin Trudeau has reached out to Vancouver Mayor -- and former NDP MLA -- Gregor Robertson asking him to run for the federal Liberals in 2015.
Smyth doesn't think Robertson will do it, but says that his sources at Vancouver City Hall confirm that Trudeau made the ask.

Trudeau could use Robertson’s profile and popularity to maintain the Liberals’ presence in the city.

Consider also the existing links between Robertson’s Vision Vancouver party and the federal Libs — from Vision-mayor-turned-Liberal-senator Larry Campbell, to Vision councillor Raymond Louie’s support for former Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh.

Robertson and Trudeau are on the same page on marijuana legalization and other issues.


To add fuel to fire, Robertson recently moved to a new home in what will be a new federal riding.

Regardless of whether Robertson jumps to federal politics, it's interesting that Trudeau is wooing high profile candidates despite his promise to hold "open nominations" in every riding across the country.

In the Chretien/Martin era, the Liberals consistently parachuted-in big name candidates and in many cases ignored the will of grass root members. Going after someone like Robertson in Vancouver certainly evokes memories of those days.

There's also questions about what's happening in the riding of Toronto Centre — Bob Rae's old riding.

Some are openly suggesting that Trudeau's team is helping star-candidate Chrystia Freeland win the nomination.


"The behind-the-scenes machinations in Toronto Centre suggest, among other things, that the entire affair has been rigged to favour one candidate over the others," Liberal insider and Sun News personality Warren Kinsella recently wrote.

"The Toronto Centre contest, which really isn’t one, recalls the bad old days of the once-great Grits, when earnest and hard-working locals were pushed aside — and out-of-touch aristocrats made their entrance, trumpets heralding their arrival, and the leader’s minions throwing rose petals ahead of them.

"Trudeau claims, with a straight face, that he is not attempting to engineer the nomination for Freeland — who does not even live in Canada, let alone Toronto Centre. But there is not a Liberal alive who believes him."

Wooing is one thing. But if Team Trudeau is really getting involved — as Kinsella seems to believe — then it looks like nothing has changed at Liberal HQ.
 
Mayor Moonbeam headed for federal politics?  I'm not entirely surprised, but I expected him to join the Greens.  Lizzy May probably didn't want him because there would be no room for both of their egos.  Trudeau may regret inviting Gregor into the Liberal Party.

Mind you, the whole reason why he went civic was the BC NDP thought he was a radical lightweight prima donna and didn't make him welcome.  I don't even think he lasted an entire term in Victoria.  Then he took over a center-left party created by former Mayor (now Liberal Senator) Larry Campbell and turned it into a radical environmentalist party.

It's also no secret that he is bank-rolled by the American Tides Foundation.

Some interesting reading on Vancouver's Mayor Moonbeam:

http://alexgtsakumis.com/2011/11/20/the-socialist-state-a-city-in-peril-gregor-robertson-re-elected-mayor-of-vancouver/

http://fairquestions.typepad.com/rethink_campaigns/2010/12/mayor-robertson-oil-tankers-tides.html

He may scare more "blue Liberals" to the Tories!
 
dapaterson said:
Andrew Leslie?  Political ambitions?

[Casablanca]

I'm shocked, shocked to find that going on here.

[/Casablanca]

Speaking of which...

Perhaps Gen. Leslie recognizes that Justin Trudeau is a defence policy lightweight and thus less likely to question/counter anything Gen.Leslie would say?

Link

Former army commander newest star recruit to Trudeau's Liberal team

OTTAWA - Justin Trudeau has begun showcasing a new Liberal team, with some surprise stars emerging.

Retired general Andrew Leslie, former commander of Canadian army, is the latest recruit.

He has agreed to co-chair an advisory council on international affairs for the Liberal leader and is not ruling out running for the party in the 2015 election.


Leslie's appointment comes a day after Trudeau named Chrystia Freeland — a former journalist, internationally acclaimed author and the party's candidate in the coming Toronto Centre byelection — as co-chair of an advisory council on the economy.

More big names — primarily people previously not associated with the Liberal party — are expected to be added to the team, in various capacities, over the coming weeks.

Behind the scenes, Trudeau's operatives have been putting huge emphasis on candidate recruitment, in a bid to infuse the party with fresh blood and demonstrate the new leader's ability to reach outside the traditional Liberal base.

They are also hoping to compensate for Trudeau's lack of experience by surrounding him with a team that boasts expertise in areas in which he may be perceived to be weak, such as the economy and foreign affairs.


"We will continue to draw in extraordinary people onto the Liberal team," Trudeau said Wednesday after announcing Leslie's appointment.

(...)
 
That should be a large team.

Isn't Trudeau weak in every area other than charisma and paddling up creeks in B.C.'s interior ???
 
S.M.A. said:
Chrystia Freeland — as co-chair of an advisory council on the economy.
She's about as left-wing as they come. I can see her draging the Liberals into a squabble with the NDP trying to out-socialist each other over who can spend the most on the oppressed, downtrodden, latte-drinkers.

At any rate, if she's Trudeau's economic advisor kiss any defence spending goodbye.
 
Interesting tactic.  He's recruiting so called (and I believe they are) experts in various areas.  No previous real political experience (and baggage) but will likely make for a formidable team.  I'm curious to see who else will be recuited...
 
Journeyman said:
At any rate, if she's Trudeau's economic advisor kiss any defence spending goodbye.
Or maybe she & Vance/Garneau'll duke it out to see who gets the $ :evil:
 
Crantor said:
Interesting tactic.  He's recruiting so called (and I believe they are) experts in various areas.  No previous real political experience (and baggage) but will likely make for a formidable team.  I'm curious to see who else will be recuited...

The real key is can these people be welded into a team, as opposed to a team of individuals advocating for their own issues. Since the center is hollow, I suspect the "team" will become a mighty hockey game of egos getting slammed into the boards......
 
Journeyman said:
Quote from: S.M.A. on 2013-09-19, 10:40:49
Chrystia Freeland — as co-chair of an advisory council on the economy.

She's about as left-wing as they come. I can see her draging the Liberals into a squabble with the NDP trying to out-socialist each other over who can spend the most on the oppressed, downtrodden, latte-drinkers.

At any rate, if she's Trudeau's economic advisor kiss any defence spending goodbye.


I'm still having trouble with this one. Chrystia Freeland is a well known social journalist who wrote, from a decidedly non-economic point of view, for quality papers like The Financial Times and The Economist, much as her opponent, Linda McQuiag was the resident "loony lefty" for Conrad Black's National Post in the 1980s. She has two books to her credit: Sale of the Century, published in 2000, about Russia's  transition to capitalism and, very recently, Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else which is not, at all, about economics.

Consider what she has to say about inequality. Compare it with what Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has to say about the same issue. But there's a difference, agree with him or not, Prof Stiglitz focuses on why inequality is problematic: it is that it reduces equality of opportunity. Freeland, on the other hand, trashes companies that have gotten more and more productive because, she suggests, they have kept wages low. The fact is that wages have grown, but overall labour costs have declined because companies are working smarter ~ see the GE Canada advertisements about robots.

I think M. Trudeau has perfectly good economic advisors in John McCallum and Scott Brison, in Ms Freeland he has a polemicist and one, as Journeyman says, who represents an extreme position on the economic spectrum.

I think the Liberals went badly off the mainstream liberal economic course in the 1960s and '70s. I think Jean Chrétien, an instictive fiscal conservative, and Paul Martin dragged the Liberal Party back towards the centre ~ an overspending centre, to be sure, but far from Pierre Trudeau's vision of money growing on trees. I think Justin Trudeau is risking all the good, hard political capital Jean Chrétien spent.
 
Liberals better be careful or Leslie will slap a 500 dollar spending limit on them and create whole bean counter staff to make them justify those expensive perks they give themselves.......
 
The CPC should get Rick Hillier to run against Leslie.

Would make for a most interesting riding for debates. 
 
Haletown said:
The CPC should get Rick Hillier to run against Leslie.

Would make for a most interesting riding for debates.

Massive headquarters vs No headquarters?
 
E.R. Campbell said:
She's about as left-wing as they come. I can see her draging the Liberals into a squabble with the NDP trying to out-socialist each other over who can spend the most on the oppressed, downtrodden, latte-drinkers.

At any rate, if she's Trudeau's economic advisor kiss any defence spending goodbye.



I'm still having trouble with this one. Chrystia Freeland is a well known social journalist who wrote, from a decidedly non-economic point of view, for quality papers like The Financial Times and The Economist, much as her opponent, Linda McQuiag was the resident "loony lefty" for Conrad Black's National Post in the 1980s. She has two books to her credit: Sale of the Century, published in 2000, about Russia's  transition to capitalism and, very recently, Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else which is not, at all, about economics.

Consider what she has to say about inequality. Compare it with what Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has to say about the same issue. But there's a difference, agree with him or not, Prof Stiglitz focuses on why inequality is problematic: it is that it reduces equality of opportunity. Freeland, on the other hand, trashes companies that have gotten more and more productive because, she suggests, they have kept wages low. The fact is that wages have grown, but overall labour costs have declined because companies are working smarter ~ see the GE Canada advertisements about robots.

I think M. Trudeau has perfectly good economic advisors in John McCallum and Scott Brison, in Ms Freeland he has a polemicist and one, as Journeyman says, who represents an extreme position on the economic spectrum.

I think the Liberals went badly off the mainstream liberal economic course in the 1960s and '70s. I think Jean Chrétien, an instictive fiscal conservative, and Paul Martin dragged the Liberal Party back towards the centre ~ an overspending centre, to be sure, but far from Pierre Trudeau's vision of money growing on trees. I think Justin Trudeau is risking all the good, hard political capital Jean Chrétien spent.


More, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from Buzzfeed Business, about why allowing Chrystia Freeland to jump on the Justin Trudeau bandwagon was a mistake:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/matthewzeitlin/how-chrystia-freeland-hastened-reuters-nexts-demise
Screen-Shot-2013-05-22-at-9.34.10-AM-300x146.jpg

How Chrystia Freeland Hastened Reuters Next’s Demise
The dynamo who left Reuters to run for a seat in Canada’s parliament was both the motivating force behind the wire service’s ambitious digital revamp and one of the primary reasons it was killed, current and former employees tell BuzzFeed.

Posted on September 25, 2013

Matthew Zeitlin
BuzzFeed Staff

Chrystia Freeland’s most recent title at Reuters was “Managing Director and Editor, Consumer News,” and she was perhaps the company’s most famous face: An accomplished journalist who had managed to both scathingly cover and serve as an honorary member of the global elite that gathers at Davos.

In New York, though, Freeland’s core aim was simpler: Launching a new website. She had departed Times Square for the Canadian parliament by the time that project collapsed this month. But though she was gone, numerous current and former Reuters staffers told BuzzFeed, Freeland had been the motivating force behind Reuters Next and one of the primary reasons the company’s new CEO decided to kill it.

Freeland is a 45-year-old diminutive journalism dynamo who made her name writing incisive portraits first of Russian oligarchs, then global plutocrats. Next was to bring some of her glamour to the low-profile wire, and she arrived with the kind of energy and panache that promised to deliver it. What she didn’t bring was a clear revenue strategy, something that had been less important when she was hired than it became to Andrew Rashbass, a Brit who arrived as Reuters CEO this summer with a focus on reviving the business as he had at The Economist.

“The project came about through sheer force of will, without Chrystia’s championing, it never would have happened,” says one Reuters employee. “Monetization was not the priority, the priority was building something for the brand.”

But any effort to build a consumer-facing product that would serve up Reuters content yet not be an obvious revenue center was bound to run into some resistance from the existing organization, which includes over 2,000 journalists and derives significant revenues from sales of terminals like Bloomberg’s to business and newsroom clients.

“[Freeland] basically tried to build this thing outside of the entire operation,” says a former Reuters employee. “She had very little contact with the newsroom itself.”

As a result, sources on Reuters’ digital side said there was flat opposition to making the consumer-facing product as good or better than Reuters’ terminal and subscription products. Of the decision to kill Reuters Next, a different former employee said that “the direction the company now wants to go in is about giving power back to the profit centers and abandoning any innovation on the consumer side.”

A Reuters representative would not comment and instead referred to the memo Rashbass wrote announcing the shuttering of Reuters Next. Freeland did not respond to repeated attempts to contact her, saying that she would only speak to BuzzFeed’s editor-in-chief or business editor.

Columnists and consultants

When Freeland came to Reuters in March 2010, her responsibilities were Reuters Insider, a video project, a column, and a role in the company’s burgeoning events and interview series.

Less than a year later, in February 2011, Stephen Adler, who joined Reuters in 2010 from Business Week, was promoted to be editor-in-chief of Reuters, leaving Freeland the number two journalism employee in the organization and, two months later, promoted to the slightly ambiguous newly created role as head of Reuters Digital.

The one area where she did have clear control was Reuters Opinion, and she quickly set about remaking it in her image. She promoted Jim Ledbetter, then editor of Reuters.com, to edit the section; appointed longtime Reuters veteran Ken Li to replace Ledbetter; and brought on Ryan McCarthy from the Huffington Post to be his deputy. For her deputy, she hired Jim Impoco, who had edited The New York Times Sunday business section and was then enterprise editor at Reuters.

Freeland next went on a hiring spree, bringing in big names (with big contracts) to write for the section such as former New York Times reporters David Rhode and David Cay Johnston, Larry Summers, and Slate media critic Jack Shafer.

Freeland herself was also a nonstop presence for Reuters, repping the brand from Davos to Aspen and every TV program in between, including frequent guest spots on Real Time with Bill Maher and Morning Joe. With these hires and her boundless energy and charisma, Freeland had already begun to burnish the reputation of Reuters. Indeed, for a short time, there was a feeling at 3 Times Square that Freeland was a digital general leading the charge to break down the wall between Reuters’ legacy and consumer businesses. At worse, the thinking went, she would be the one to combine the two sides into one seamless newsroom and, ideally, achieve a leadership position for the consumer business over the terminal side. For a brief moment in 2011, Reuters was in a talent arms race with its two biggest rivals, Dow Jones and Bloomberg, and at least outwardly seemed to be the hottest place of the three to go work.

Her quick action and relentless energy impressed David Thomson, the chairman of Thomson Reuters, who decided that Freeland was the ideal executive to revamp Reuters’ web presence — in part because of her convincing.

“Chrystia is not a shrinking violet,” said the first former Reuters employee. “She gets right in there, and says, ‘This is mine.’”

After Freeland committed to Reuters Next, she set about clearing out many existing Thomson Reuters employees to make room for her own people. Between Reuters.com employees and people brought on to Reuters Next, around 60 people were working under Freeland. And that’s not including the consultants she hired.

Activate, the media consulting firm run by former McKinsey and MTV executive Michael Wolf, was hired to work on Reuters Next in 2011 and started working with vendors in January when the Reuters Next onto the eight floor of the lavish Thomson Reuters headquarters in Times Square. An October 2012 launch date for Reuters Next was set.

“The project decided against using any internal resources; the belief was that they were mired in bureaucracy and they were not the team to build a new vision for editorial,” the current Reuters employee said.
The decision to hire outside vendors infuriated “skeptical [Reuters] insiders,” said yet another former Reuters employee who was involved with the Next project.

Costs steadily rose with new hires and payments to vendors and consultants as the project dragged on and the launch date was continually postponed. While earlier articles estimated the cost at around $5 million, sources close to the project said that actual figure was three to four times that amount, or between $15 and $20 million. Moreover, the first former Reuters employee said that Activate itself was paid $300,000 a month.
A representative for Activate declined to comment on the record.

Further, of the new employees brought in on the editorial and technical side, none had been at Reuters long enough to know what the experience of being a Reuters journalist was like; they had all quit or gotten fired, sources said.

“When you are building something to become the tip of the spear of the company, you need to know how the company operates,” the Reuters employee said. But Freeland “doesn’t do the thing where you talk to the rest of the people in the company,” said the first former Reuters employee, “She just steamrolls in.”

As the project progressed, the editorial team that Freeland hired, which included a gaggle of editors from the Huffington Post, were sitting on the eighth floor with little to do. “They’re literally sitting there, moving things around on the legacy site, some of them are doing some opinion stuff,” the first former Reuters employee said. “Their time was squandered, they were supposed to be vertical editors,” added the current Reuters insider.


In my, admittedly biased, opinion Chrysia Freeland is a journalist of the sort who do their best work in People magazine.  Despite "writing incisive portraits first of Russian oligarchs, then global plutocrats," she is not an economist nor a business manager, she's a gifted writer and a minor league celebrity but she brings nothing to M. Trudeau's economic team. He needs, actually he deserves better than this.
 
I sounds like Trudeau has also drunk the Chrystia Freeland koolaid....
 
I have said, several times, that I want the Liberal Party of Canada to get its act together with a good leader and a good front bench team. I'm a Conservative, and a significant contributor to that party, but I know that the CPC is going to get stale and corrupt and will need to be replaced for a term or two while they re-energize themselves. I cannot make myself believe that the NDP, even with a good, solid leader, is in any way ready to govern. The government in waiting needs to be the Liberal Party of Canada and it needs to have a centrist position. Ms Freeland is not a centrist; she is a silk stocking socialist, rather like Pierre Trudeau and she's wrong for the LPC and wrong for Canada.
 
E.R. Campbell said:
that the CPC is going to get stale and corrupt and will need to be replaced for a term or two while they re-energize themselves.

As a life long Tory, it saddens me to say it, but I think the CPC has allready become stale and corrupt as evidenced by the steady trickle of scandals erupting around various Senators and MPs. Certain members seem to have entered the "terminal entitlement" phase of the political life cycle. My observation is when the evidence of terminal entitlement becomes too obvious the Canadian electorate decrees a re-stacking of the chairs. We saw this oh about 10 years ago with the Liberals and just over 20 for the Mulroney PCs. Unfortunately the Manley/Martin (Blue?) Liberals do not seem to be in the drivers seat, so when the time comes for a change of government I agree that we will be left with a choice of stale, bad and worse.
 
tomydoom said:
As a life long Tory, it saddens me to say it, but I think the CPC has allready become stale and corrupt as evidenced by the steady trickle of scandals erupting around various Senators and MPs. Certain members seem to have entered the "terminal entitlement" phase of the political life cycle. My observation is when the evidence of terminal entitlement becomes too obvious the Canadian electorate decrees a re-stacking of the chairs. We saw this oh about 10 years ago with the Liberals and just over 20 for the Mulroney PCs. Unfortunately the Manley/Martin (Blue?) Liberals do not seem to be in the drivers seat, so when the time comes for a change of government I agree that we will be left with a choice of stale, bad and worse.


And, as if to prove your point, Global News is reporting that "Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro has been kicked out of the Conservative caucus following news Thursday he has been charged with four offences under the Canada Elections Act."

I have no brief for (or against) Mr. Del Mastro, beyond the innocent until proven guilty, but if I accept your premise that the CPC is already past it's 'best before date,' I find it very, very difficult to believe that M. Trudeau can build a useful government-in-waiting in the next 24 months ~ especially not if he is taking economic advice from the likes of Ms Freeland. Scott Brison? Yes, I can imagine him as Finance Minister, I would be comfortable with him as Finance Minister. Chrystia Freeland? No, but I would be comfortable with her as a back bench MP ... far back.
 
E.R. Campbell said:
And, as if to prove your point, Global News is reporting that "Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro has been kicked out of the Conservative caucus following news Thursday he has been charged with four offences under the Canada Elections Act."

I have no brief for (or against) Mr. Del Mastro, beyond the innocent until proven guilty, but if I accept your premise that the CPC is already past it's 'best before date,' I find it very, very difficult to believe that M. Trudeau can build a useful government-in-waiting in the next 24 months ~ especially not if he is taking economic advice from the likes of Ms Freeland. Scott Brison? Yes, I can imagine him as Finance Minister, I would be comfortable with him as Finance Minister. Chrystia Freeland? No, but I would be comfortable with her as a back bench MP ... far back.

I agree, I would compare the situation to the Martin era Liberals, where the LPC was clearly past it's best before date, but the Conservatives were not yet viewed as "ready for prime time".  I can forsee a the CPC reduced to a minority government in the next election and a Trudeau (god help us) minority in the election after that. 

That said I would hesitate the underestimate the unfortunate affection that many Canadians (Ontarians?) have for the name "Trudeau". I am aware that the name is an anathema in much of the country between Vancouver and Ontario, however Ontario still accounts for 14 Million people and a swing in the suburban 905 belt around Toronto would be enough to reduce the CPC to minority government.  While those suburban voters are socially conservative, they still hold great affection for PET as they credit him with letting them into the country, I say this as someone who lived in Peel Region for 10 years and the Tories may find the current support that they enjoy in those ridings is a mile wide and an inch deep.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top